Dear All,I have been trying to get to implement the ECN system which a lot of engineering companies follow but I have not been able to find a way to do that in the ERP.What is ECN?It is basically a process by which a design data can be changed in a product. So in common language it means that if there is a product then the drawing of the product needs to be changed then the person wanting the change would first issue a ECR (Engineering Change Request) and this request is forwarded to the person who would pass t his ECR and it would become a ECN.Now I have had a thought that we could attach individual drawings of each item in the item master itself but the file management system is such that there is no way to track the changes made to the file.Is there a way to do such thing in ERP?
Good afternoon, I was wondering if meanwhile there has been anything implemented to support an ECN Process?
Do you have a spec? This should be just a simple DocType
rmehta, The ECN process, at least at my company, is pretty convoluted. I’m currently looking into the structure, I’ll let you know my findings.
We use the hosted version. As @cpurbaugh has noted, the ECN process can be complex. For a simple start, is it possible to include a simple feature to replace ITEM 1 with ITEM 2 on all BOMs that use ITEM 1 and record history? Often times, parts go obsolete or are defective or etc. and new Items with new Manufacturer and Supplier information are created to replace the obsolete/defective/hard to source/etc. ITEM 1. I would appreciate your thoughts and input.
I am using a basic ECN process that I have used successfully in the past with other ERP systems that either didn’t include a formal ECN process or the feature wasn’t purchased. I use a “-xx” Item Code suffix to denote the revision level of the item. Initial release is revision -00 and any revision to fit, form or function increases the revision revision level. Custom parts get revised as a result of design changes, but COTS parts usually stay at revision -00. Suppliers can be added and removed from an Item so long as the fit/form/function stays the same. If the ECN process requires capturing approval of the change (e.g. to record approval of an updated purchase spec’s), I attach a scanned signed paper signature page to the item to record the approval.
BOMs must be revised when an Item is revised to replace the old revision level item with new revision level item (as well as other potential changes). ERPNext manages BOM changes internally, but any change in a custom part warrants a new revision level (-00, -01, -02), which to ERPNext is a new Item, so a new BOM must be created for the new revision level. If there is a significant change in fit, form, or function happening, I would tend to create a brand new item (i.e. a completely different Item Code). Attaching a scanned signed paper signature page records approval.
I think this would make a good start for many organizations. Everything doesn’t have to change all at once implementing an ERP. Many projects fail trying to do too much. In a staged approach, the client continues to follow their existing ECN/ECO process for the most part, but moving the change approval record into ERPNext starts them on the path of Digital Transformation (sorry for the lapse into marketing-speak ). The process could eventually be automated in ERPNext, but the business should still think carefully about justifying the effort compared to other priorities.
Other good idea I had was to include a module for Quality Management (ISO 9000) which might cover these documents.
Do you mean just the process documents and records controlled by the QMS, or would it provide a general document management interface as well?
I think of quality documents as just one view, one of many possible views, into a pool of managed documents. In the entire pool, there documents associated with:
- Items and BOMs (e.g. engineering design documents, OEM datasheet for purchased item…),
- orders (e.g. some piece of paper for some reason, that needs to be attached to a sales order, purchase order, delivery order…),
- product-specific manufacturing processes documents (e.g. assembly procedure, test procedure…),
- processes prescribed in the quality management system (e.g. ISO 9001, which fwiw is essentially a product requirements tree itself)
- records showing compliance with a process or procedure prescribed by the QMS (process control documents, quality audit report documents, etc.), or with a product-specific or general task which is outside the scope of the QMS (e.g. product test results, shipping orders).
I’m only starting to now read discuss topics on document control, so my apologies if this topic has been discussed a thousand times before and it’s me that’s coming to the party late…
It think it is in-scope for ERPNext to provide some basic document control process for capturing arbitrary documents from outside (at the simplest, binary blobs), and also provide the mechanisms to access documents, prove their pedigree to point of entry, manage change when updated externally and re-submitted, etc… IMHO
@Dale_Scott will be great if you can update the GitHub issue related to this or create a new one. If there is enough interest, someone will take it up!
Hi @rmehta, I will continue researching and will find the GitHub issue you referenced. I have read some very insightful thinking in discuss.erpnext on manufacturing and document control (e.g. @JayRam @Dbone, youself…), and I was hoping you guys (who are much smarter than I am!) would just sort it out.
I recently become aware of “manufacturing module” discussions, and manufacturing was an early driver for document control. Where are discussions and decisions about document control happening? E.g. will the ISO-9001 people manage quality documents on their own? And will the manufacturing people manage PLM and manufacturing process documentation on their own?